Slashdot Mirror
No Billboards in Space
An anonymous reader writes "CNN is reporting that the Federal Aviation Administration proposed Thursday to amend its regulations to ensure that it can enforce a law that prohibits 'obtrusive' advertising in zero gravity." From the article: "For instance, outsized billboards deployed by a space company into low Earth orbit could appear as large as the moon and be seen without a telescope, the FAA said. Big and bright advertisements might hinder astronomers."
No big, bright billboards by highways either- because they are a distraction to drivers.
Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
Okay, the FAA controls the US airspace, right? So, they probably won't allow any of these LEO Billboards to be launched in the U.S.
Of course, there's virtually nothing they can do if an LEO craft is launched from some other location and meanders over the U.S. from time to time.
Perhaps they could do something if it were placed in a geostationary orbit over the U.S. but then it wouldn't be in LEO.
"It's a very tangled subsystem." --Windows kernel guru
Seriously, I don't think doing something like this would be a positive step for a company to take. They'd get a whole lot of publicity out of it right at the beginning, but pretty soon it'd become a major eyesore, and there'd be a lot of loathing towards them for putting it there. Looking at it would get old really quick.
There'd probably be some significant protesting outside their HQ and whatnot. There would be calls for boycotting, which would probably gain some traction, as people become more and more tired of it.
If some company did it, and it was only visible up there for a few days, they'd get some serious publicity, and if they let it die while it was still a novelty, they'd get mostly good press and an excited public. I'd check a website to find out when it'd be overhead, and then go watch it pass over a few times. Just as long as it doesn't stay long enough to become an eyesore.
After a few of these advertisements happened, it'd cease to be a novelty, and the excitement of seeing one would wear off, and people would turn against them.
That's how I imagine it at least.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
> I wasn't aware that the US owned space.
:-)
It would be silly to say that the US owns space. That would be like saying that it owns, oh, Iraq. Historically nations have had "ownership" according to how far they can project force. The "three mile limit" for ocean ownership was determined by the range of shore guns. The USSR did not "own" its airspace until it proved that it could shoot down a U2 spy plane.
If the US Air Force succeds in militarizing space, the US may indeed "own" it. That may prove easier than "owning" Iraq.
On a separate topic, it seems to me that a LEO banner would be visible mostly at dusk or dawn. How would it be lit in the middle of the night? Reflection from terrestrial lights maybe, or flourexcent paint?
The U.S. can't unilaterally say "no billboards in space" but they can certainly say things like "US based companies can't put billboards in space" or "no launching rockets from US territory to put a billboard in space" or similar things. Also, outlawing it here in the US could be a step toward getting other countries and/or international organizations to outlaw the practice too. Then if you wanted to put a billboard in space, you'd have to launch it from someplace like North Korea or Syria or international waters (but your ship couldn't be registered in a country that signed onto the treaty), and once in orbit it would last about 10 minutes before a UN missile shot it down (as agreed previously in a UN resolution).
So yes, if just the US outlaws this, it's silly, but it could be a step toward something more meaningful.
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?